Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
An Amicis Brief from the Council of his friend isn't grounds for recusal?He didn't have to recuse himself. Even if he were aware that a Council that his friend paid dues to, wrote a brief, he woudn't of had to recuse himself.
My rules proposedYou are irrelevant....you don't make any rules......didn't your wife explain this to you already?
Typically no, though I doubt if many children of rich high officials work after schoolSo kids don’t have to report anything?
haha Congress can’t even do their current job for one…two they have no business or authority telling a seperate co equal branch of govt where they have conflictsFinancial disclosure would also allow congress to check for such conflicts too.
who treats them like gods???Because there is no punishment involved?
If we insist on treating these people like Gods, don't clutch your pearls when they act like them
the constitution doesnt allow those powers to congress,,Financial disclosure would also allow congress to check for such conflicts too.
I havent heard your opinion on sotomayor not recusing herself after being paid millions and then overseeing a case on the people that paid her millions??Because there is no punishment involved?
If we insist on treating these people like Gods, don't clutch your pearls when they act like them
1) NoAn Amicis Brief from the Council of his friend isn't grounds for recusal?
I thought he claimed his friend had no business before the court?
You should know that the court has to grand permission for someone to file an Amicus Brief. And someone O.K.'d a justices friends Council to submit a brief.
dembots don’t care about the constitution that’s why they want upend the judicial branchthe constitution doesnt allow those powers to congress,,
Of course there are standards...at any point that there impartility might be reasonably questioned, where they have personal bias or prejudice.
There are no requirements for disclosure. What Judge recused where one didnt?
The differene between Thomas and Sotomayor, is that there was NO case in front of the Court involving the family friend...unlike Sotomayor. There was no actual conflict.
why???Ginni Thomas was heavily involved in election fraud conspiracies. Clarence Thomas should have recused himself from cases related to stolen elections
The da garchetti did that by moving the trial from the burbs to downtown. He wanted a maximum amount of blacks on the jury to avoid another riot. He admitted this in the first episode of the ESPN oj documentary.True. Democrats are gonna try to remove conservative Justices just like OJ Simpson lawyers removed jury members during his trial. Democrats are going to search and scour every minute detail and blow it up to fabricate a crisis in the Court so They can replace Justices or at the least cause the American citizens to lose confidence in the Court. Democrats love democracy until they don't love democracy.
Congress has oversight responsibility over the government, both the executive and judicial branches,. Nobody ever said they did their job well, but it is their job, and they need the information to do their job.haha Congress can’t even do their current job for one…two they have no business or authority telling a seperate co equal branch of govt where they have conflicts
and lastly they have a hard enough time following their own ethical rules…heck AOC whi’s been leading the attacks on Thomas is herself under a Congressional ethics probe
they don’t have oversight of the president, VP, or the SCOTUS.on how they run their branches. They are seperate coequal branches of Govt.Congress has oversight responsibility over the government, both the executive and judicial branches,. Nobody ever said they did their job well, but it is their job, and they need the information to do their job.
haha name a case for usGinni Thomas was heavily involved in election fraud conspiracies. Clarence Thomas should have recused himself from cases related to stolen elections
Wouldn't the same logic apply to the families of all senior government officials, say Melania Trump or Hunter Biden?
"No mention of Ginni.' Conservative activist directed money to wife of Justice Clarence Thomas
Leonard Leo directed money to Ginni Thomas, according to a new report. It's the latest news about money and gifts Clarence Thomas and his family have received.www.usatoday.com
"A well-known conservative legal activist who has helped shape the modern Supreme Court arranged for the wife of Justice Clarence Thomas to receive tens of thousands of dollars for consulting work - Leonard Leo, the former longtime vice president of the Federalist Society who helped President Donald Trump’s administration vet nominees for the high court, instructed Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway to bill a nonprofit called the Judicial Education Project and to pay Virginia "Ginni" Thomas $25,000 - No mention of Ginni, of course," The Post quoted Leo instructing Conway."
The Post reported that Conway's firm, the Polling Company, paid Ginni Thomas's firm $80,000 between June 2011 and June 2012 and expected to pay $20,000 more before the end of 2012. It was not clear what the money was for, though Leo told The Post in a statement that it "involved gauging public attitudes and sentiment." In his statement to The Post, Leo explained his desire to keep Ginni Thomas' name off the paperwork by asserting he has "always tried to protect the privacy of Justice Thomas and Ginni" because of how "disrespectful, malicious and gossipy people can be.”
Leonard Leo is right; the spouses of Supreme Court justices shouldn't be subjected to the vengeful, malicious world of politics - therefore they shouldn't have to disclose anything they receive financially from mega donors - unless those donors are supporting causes that we disagree with...in that case, it is sinister and worthy of prosecution. However, that is not the case in this situation...Ginni has always made it known that she is apolitical and seldom engages in any sort of political pressure campaigns or activism --out of respect for her husband's position as Supreme Court justice.
The lib media and the Deep State are only going after Clarence because he is a black....but a good black, not a bad black like Ketanji Jackson...why won't they investigate her and her spouse? Why won't they talk about the 34 million she received from China once she was nominated to the Supreme Court? There are also reports that her husband received 22 million from Soros for his work in planning terrorist attacks with Antifa as well as training trannies to become mass shooters...why isn't anyone investigating that? Why? because the media and the Deep State are at war with Conservatives, especially black Conservatives and their families.
And the defense and idiot judge removed over half the original jurors and replaced them with morons.The da garchetti did that by moving the trial from the burbs to downtown. He wanted a maximum amount of blacks on the jury to avoid another riot. He admitted this in the first episode of the ESPN oj documentary.
congress doesnt have a leg to stand on for any of those proposals until they control spouses and members from making millions on insider trading.
Because the election was stolen.Ginni Thomas was heavily involved in election fraud conspiracies.
